See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/369786745

Estimation of toughness as a function of compression strength parallel to the

grain of tropical woods

Article in Bioresources · April 2023

DOI: 10.15376/biores.18.2.3590-3597

CITATIONS READS

0 15

11 authors, including:

Heloiza Candeia Ruthes Herisson FERREIRA DOS Santos

Universidade Federal de São Carlos Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia de Rondônia (IFRO)
11 PUBLICATIONS 8 CITATIONS 19 PUBLICATIONS 35 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Victor De Araujo Vinicius Borges de Moura Aquino

São Paulo State University Universidade Federal do Sul e Sudeste do Pará
115 PUBLICATIONS 619 CITATIONS 74 PUBLICATIONS 208 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Projeto PIPE View project

Masonry reinforcements to different aplications View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Victor De Araujo on 04 April 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com

Estimation of Toughness as a Function of Compression

Strength Parallel to the Grain of Tropical Woods
Heloiza Candeia Ruthes,a Herisson Ferreira dos Santos,b Victor Almeida De Araujo,a,c*
Maximiliano dos Anjos Azambuja,d Vinicius Borges de Moura Aquino,e Eduardo
Chahud,f Luiz Antônio Melgaço Nunes Branco,f Higor Rogério Favarim,c Cristiane
Inácio de Campos,c Francisco Antonio Rocco Lahr,g and André Luis Christoforo a

Tropical species are widely used in construction, and their physical and
mechanical properties have been important characteristics with direct
impact on the design of structures, especially the strength and stiffness of
wood applied in them. Tests to obtain both parameters are conducted
under ABNT NBR 7190 (1997) guidelines in Brazil, being rarely found in
some research centers because of the higher costs of testing equipment.
For instance, the toughness test depends on equipment with a pendulum,
whose device requires accuracy and maintenance for reliable analyses.
This paper aims to estimate toughness through another property more
easily found, given by the compression strength parallel to the grain. For
this, 20 tropical wood species of the South American region were used to
obtain initial values of these properties. The characteristic values of the
compression strength parallel to the grain as well as linear and quadratic
regression models were obtained. Statistical analysis was performed and
confirmed that a linear model gave better predictions than a quadratic
model.

DOI: 10.15376/biores.18.2.3590-3597

Keywords: Toughness; Compressive strength; Regression models; Tropical woods; Characterization

Contact information: a: Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of São Carlos, São Carlos,
Brazil; b: Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Rondônia, Ariquemes, Brazil;
c: Science and Engineering Institute, São Paulo State University, Itapeva, Brazil; d: Department of Civil
Engineering, São Paulo State University, Bauru, Brazil; e: Araguaia Engineering Institute, Federal
University of Southern and Southeastern Pará, Santana do Araguaia, Brazil; f: Department of Civil
Engineering, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil; g: Department of Structural
Engineering, University of São Paulo, São Carlos, Brazil; *Corresponding author: va.araujo@unesp.br

INTRODUCTION

Because of extensive forests with numerous species, Brazil is among the largest
global wood producers. Wood is used in construction due to its adequate performance.
Solid woods, from natural and processed types, are indispensable materials for 17
different timber construction techniques. Timber buildings are produced through a rich
possibility of exotic and native woods. About 50 wood species have been commercially
utilized in Brazil, including 40 species naturally originating in this tropical region (De
Araujo 2021a,b). This diversity justifies the importance of knowing physico-mechanical
properties for projects of timber structures (Dias and Lahr 2004).
Testing equipment is usually expensive and available in well-developed research
centers. The complete wood characterization is a complex activity, mainly because of the
lack of laboratories with the specific machines to perform all the tests and their involved

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3590
PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com
high costs (Christoforo et al. 2017). The resistance to compression parallel to the grain (fc0)
and toughness (W) are among those important properties of wood for construction.
These structural properties are determined through tests prescribed by the Brazilian
standard document for timber structures (ABNT NBR 7190, 1997). Obtaining the
compression strength parallel to the grain is performed with a universal testing machine,
which is usually available in structural laboratories. Toughness is defined as the energy
required to fracture a specimen. This quantity is hard to obtain because the same standard
test for its determination must be performed in the radial and tangential directions with the
aid of a pendulum machine with a capacity three to five times greater than the energy
required to break the specimen by bending.
The use of non-destructive tests can facilitate the prediction and/or attainment of
properties (Teles 2014; Chen and Guo 2017). However, performing this type of test also
requires the use of unique equipment that is often costly. In this context, several studies
have shown that it is possible to estimate a property that is difficult to obtain through
another that is more easily obtained by means of regression models with significant
adjustments (Almeida et al. 2014; Wolenski et al. 2020; Lahr et al. 2021).
Thus, this work aims to estimate the toughness property (W) as a function of the
characteristic compression strength parallel to the grain (fc0,k) using 20 tropical wood
species through linear and quadratic regression models. The experimental tests to obtain W
and fc0,k of the 20 species were performed according to ABNT NBR 7190 (1997) and,
therefore, 12 samples were used for each wood species. Subsequently, the models were
generated and statistical tests were performed to assess the significance of these.

EXPERIMENTAL

Materials
Twenty commercial tropical wood species were analyzed, four of which having
their resistance class already determined by the ABNT NBR 7190 (1997) (Table 1). The
wood specimens were prepared according to the recommendations of ABNT NBR 7190
(1997). Twelve specimens per wood species were prepared for each test, totaling 480
specimens. The specimens were manufactured from the wood of the tested species, dried
in the air, and preserved with a moisture content close to the equilibrium moisture content,
that is, 12%±1%, also by ABNT NBR 7190 (1997), taken from different pieces of wood,
away from the edges and free of defects.
Tests were conducted in the Laboratory of Wood and Wood Structures (LaMEM)
at the University of São Paulo (USP). For the toughness test, a machine with an energy
capacity three times greater than that required to break specimens by bending was used.
The specimens used in the tenacity test had a square section of 2 cm on a side and a length
along the fibers of 30 cm. For the parallel compressive strength test, the fibers were used
as test specimens with a prismatic square section of 5 cm on a side and a length of 15 cm.
Test specimens were supported on two axes with a distance of 24 cm between them for the
subsequent impact of the pendulum. The universal testing machine (AMSLER®; São
Carlos, Brazil) with a load capacity of 25 tons was used to test the compressive strength
parallel to grain. Tests were conducted under the guidelines of the ABNT NBR 7190 (1997)
to obtain the necessary properties: fc0 and W. For each trial, 12 samples per wood species
described in Table 1 were used at 12% moisture content as prescribed as the test condition
by this standard document, totaling 480 experiments.

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3591
PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com
Table 1. Twenty Tropical Wood Species under Evaluation
Common Name Scientific Name Strength Class ID
Cambará Rosa Erisma uncinatum C20 1
Cedrinho Erisma spp. C20 2
Cedro Doce Cedrela sp. C20 3
Cedroarana Cedrelinga catenaeformis C20 4
Copaíba Copaifera spp. C30 5
Cedro Amargo Cedrela odorata C30 6
Canafístula Peltophorum dubium C30 7
Castanheira Bertholletia excelsa C30 8
Catanudo Micropholis sp. C40 9
Louro Verde Cordia sellowiana C40 10
Abiu Casca Grossa Pouteria pachycarpa C40 11
Angelim Araroba Vataireopsis araroba C40 12
Angelim Saia Parkia sp. C50 13
Castelo Calycophyllum multiflorum C50 14
Guarucaia Peltophorum vogelianum C50 15
Cupiúba Goupia paraensis C50 16
Itaúba Mezilaurus itauba C60 17
Jatobá Hymenaea stilbocarpa C60 18
Tachi Tachigali sp. C60 19
Angelim Ferro Hymenolobium spp. C60 20

Methods
Initially, moisture contents of all 12 samples and all 20 species were obtained to
ensure that the other experiments would be performed close to the ideal condition of dry
moisture (U = 12%). Thus, tests for the fc0 and W were conducted. The values obtained
from fc0 with moisture contents close to 12% were corrected for the exact moisture content
of 12% using Eq. 1, as determined by the ABNT NBR 7190 (1997), in which fc0,U is the
strength obtained from the sample's moisture content (%); U is the sample's moisture
content (%), and fc0,12 is the strength (MPa) corrected at 12% moisture content. The
obtained values of fc0,12 were used to generate the regression models. Equation 1 is as
follows:
2∙(𝑈−12)
𝑓𝑐0,12 = 𝑓𝑐0,𝑈 × [1 + ] (1)
100

Through measurements performed during the experiment, the length of the Charpy
pendulum arm (L) (m) and the final height that the pendulum reaches after impact with the
specimen (L') (m), the toughness of each sample was calculated using Eq 2, where m is the
mass (g) of the pendulum and g is the acceleration (9.81 m/s²) due to gravity:
𝑊 = 𝑚 × 𝑔 × (𝐿 − 𝐿′ ) (2)
With the fc0 values obtained, the characteristic compression strength parallel to the
grain (fc0,k) (Eq. 3) was calculated, according to ABNT NBR 7190 (1997), not taking a
value lower than f1 and 0.7 of the average value of the resistances obtained, where (f1... fn)
is the compression strength parallel to the grain of the samples in increasing order, and n
is the number of samples.
𝑓1 +𝑓2 +⋯𝑓𝑛
−1
2
𝑓𝑐0,𝑘 = (2 × 𝑛 − 𝑓𝑛 ) × 1,1 (3)
2
−1 2

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3592
PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com
Regression models used linear (Eq. 4) and quadratic functions (Eq. 5), in which β1,
β2 and β3 are the independent terms to be adjusted by the least squares method. Such models
seek to estimate toughness through an easily obtainable property, the compression strength
parallel to the grain.
𝑊 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1 × 𝑓𝑐0 (4)
2
𝑊 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1 × 𝑓𝑐0 + 𝛽2 𝑓𝑐0 (5)
The models were generated using the totality of the species and with the average
values of W and characteristic compression strength, calculated with 12 samples of each
species. Analyzing the efficiency of obtained models, the coefficient of determination (R²)
was calculated using Eq. 6, where n is the number of specimens, Ydata is the mean value
experimentally obtained, and Ypredicti is the value estimated by regression models. The
analysis of variance (ANOVA) (Minitab®, version 19.2020.1, São Carlos, Brazil) was used
to confirm the correlation and the significance of the model at a 5%.
∑𝑛
𝑖=1(𝑌𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖 −𝑌𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑖 )²
𝑅2 (%) = 100 × (1 − ) (6)
∑𝑛 ̅
𝑖=1(𝑌𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑖 −𝑌𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑖 )²

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of fc0 and W are presented in Figs. 1 and 2, respectively. The values
identified in each bar are the property means for each species, and also the 95% confidence
interval (CI) for the mean of each species. The coefficient of variation is also identified
(CV), with the highest and lowest values obtained for each species.
For fc0 (Fig. 1), it was observed that most tropical species reached a coefficient of
variation below the limit stipulated by the ABNT NBR 7190 (1997) of 18% for normal
stresses, with the lowest value being 5.12 % and the highest coefficient of variation was
25.42. Three wood species exceeded this limit: Erisma spp. (CV = 25.42%), Vataireopsis
araroba (CV = 22.77%), and Calycophyllum multiflorum (CV = 18.88%). These results
supported the diversified quality of the samples used in the tests to determine fc0.

Fig. 1. Average values of compression parallel to grain (fc0) for the 20 tropical woods

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3593
PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com
For W (Fig. 2), nine tropical woods were extrapolated the limit of 28% for
tangential efforts of the ABNT NBR 7190 (1997) in their CVs such as Erisma uncinatum
(CV = 35.26%), Pouteria pachycarpa (CV = 39.95%), Vataireopsis araroba (CV =
37.97%), Parkia sp. (CV = 31.30%), Goupia Pará (CV = 36.99%), Erisma spp. (CV =
37.93%), Cedrelinga catenaeformis (CV = 40.00%), Bertholletia excelsa (CV = 36.49%),
and Micropholis sp. (42.93%). The coefficient of variation ranged from 8.07% to 42.93%.
The fc0,k values are demonstrated in Fig. 3. These values were calculated according
to the guidelines of ABNT NBR 7190 (1997), corroborating with that known strength
classification of the analyzed tropical wood species, as described in Table 1.
Table 2 shows linear and quadratic models to estimate W as a function of the fc0,k
for the 20 species. This table demonstrates the p-value evaluating the significance of the
model, coefficient of determination (R²) and the adjusted coefficient of determination
(R²adj), that is, the percentage of the response that is explained by the model obtained.

Fig. 2. Average values of toughness (W) for the 20 tropical woods

Fig. 3. Characteristic Compressive Strength (fc0,k) for the 20 tropical woods

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3594
PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com
Table 2. Tropical Wood Species: Regression Models and Coefficients per Model
Model Equation p-value R² (%) R²adj (%)
Linear W = - 0.302 + 0.02608fc0,k 0.000 71.51 69.93
Quadratic W = - 0.271 + 0.0248fc0,k + 0,000012fc0,k2 0.000 71.51 68.16

For the linear model (Fig. 4), the only term of the model was significant, having a
p-value equal to 0.00. The model with fc0,k was capable of estimating toughness with
significant accuracy of 71.51%. In the quadratic model (Fig. 4), the coefficient of
determination was the same (71.51%) as for the linear model. In this last case, there was
no benefit to the model in adding the square of the term of fc0,k as a predictor. This
observation respected the ANOVA, in which the p-value found for the term, was equal to
0.956; therefore the square term did not make a significant contribution to the model.
In the research conducted by Almeida et al. (2014), the W was also estimated
through a property with relative ease of attainment, the apparent density (ρap). The results
also showed a satisfactory correlation between these properties. Moreover, linear model
had an adjusted coefficient of determination (R²adj) of 79.90% as well as the adjusted
coefficient of determination was 80.60% for the quadratic model, which implies that both
models are satisfactory in the estimation of toughness. Although the models obtained by
Almeida et al. (2014) have R²adj greater than those obtained for the models with fc0, the
results demonstrate a correlation between the fc0 and W; and because they have a coefficient
of determination (R²) greater than 70% - this indicates an adequate quality of the obtained
adjustments, according to Montgomery (2005).

Fig. 4. Linear and quadratic regression models

CONCLUSIONS

1. The experimental results for the fc0 and W showed good distribution of the sample to
obtain the proposed regression models.
2. The linear regression model proved to be significant, as well as all its predictor terms,
in the estimation of W as a function of fc0,k, because both coefficient of determination
(R²) and the adjusted coefficient of determination (R²adj) were around 70%.

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3595
PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com
3. The quadratic regression model also demonstrated significance in estimating W.
However, the quadratic term proved not to be significant to the model and therefore the
adjusted coefficient of determination obtained was lower (68.16%) for this model
compared to the previous one.
4. The linear model presented the best choice, according to the results of the statistical
analysis, implying that it is possible to estimate the wood toughness with significant
precision through this model for tropical species, using experimental results of the
compression strength parallel to the grain.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de

Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brazil (CAPES) for its support of this work.

REFERENCES CITED

ABNT NBR 7190 (1997). “Projeto de estruturas de madeira [Design of wooden

structures],” Brazilian Association of Technical Standards, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Almeida, D. H., Scaliante, R. M., Christoforo, A. L., Varanda, L. D., Lahr, F. A. R., Dias,
A. A., and Calil Junior, C. (2014). “Wooden toughness as function of the apparent
density,” Revista Árvore 38(1), 203-207. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-67622014000100020
Chen, Y., and Guo, W. (2017). “Nondestructive evaluation and reliability analysis for
determining the mechanical properties of old wood of ancient timber structure,”
BioResources 12(2), 2310-2325. DOI: 10.15376/biores.12.2.2310-2325
Christoforo, A. L., Aftimus, B. H. C., Panzera, T. H., Machado, G. O., and Lahr, F. A. R.
(2017). “Physico-mechanical characterization of the Anadenanthera colubrine wood
species,” Engenharia Agrícola 37(2), 376-384. DOI: 10.1590/1809-4430-
Eng.Agric.v37n2p376-384/2017
De Araujo, V. (2021). “Timber construction as a multiple valuable sustainable
alternative: Main characteristics, challenge remarks and affirmative actions,”
International Journal of Construction Management (Online), 1-10. DOI:
10.1080/15623599.2021.1969742
De Araujo, V., Vasconcelos, J., Gava, M., Lahr, F. A. R., Christoforo, A. L., and Garcia,
J. N., (2021). “What does Brazil know about the origin and uses of tree species
employed in the housing sector? Perspectives on available species, origin and current
challenges,” International Forestry Review 23(3), 392-404. DOI:
10.1505/146554821833992794
Dias, F. M., and Lahr, F. A. R. (2004). “Strength and stiffness properties of wood
esteemed through the specific gravity,” Scientia Forestalis 65, 102-113.
Lahr, F. A. R., Arroyo, F. N., Rodrigues, E. F. C., Almeida, J. P. B., Aquino, V. B. M.,
Wolenski, A. R. V., Santos, H. F., Ferraz, A. L. N., Chahud, E., Molina, J. C., et al.
(2021). “Models to estimate longitudinal compressive strength of Brazilian hardwood
based on apparent density,” BioResources 16(1), 1373-1381. DOI:
10.15376/biores.16.1.1373-1381

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3596
 PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com
Montgomery, D. C. (2005). Design and Analysis of Experiments, John Wiley & Sons,
Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
Teles, R. F. (2014). Ensaios Não Destrutivos para Avaliar o Desempenho de Madeiras
Amazônicas Tratadas Quimicamente [Non-destructive Tests to Evaluate the
Performance of Chemically Treated Amazonian Woods], Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Brasília, Brasília, Brazil.
Wolenski, A. R. V., Almeida, J. P. B., Christoforo, A. L., Lahr, F. A. R., and Peixoto, R.
G. (2020). “Estimation model of mechanical properties from the compressive strength
values,” Maderas: Ciencia y Tecnologia 22(4), 483-494. DOI: 10.4067/S0718-
221X2020005000407

Article submitted: November 3, 2022; Peer review completed: December 31, 2022;
Revised version received: January 9, 2023; Accepted: January 17, 2023; Published: April
4, 2023.
DOI: 10.15376/biores.18.2.3590-3597

Ruthes et al. (2023). “Toughness vs. compressive,” BioResources 18(1), 3590-3597. 3597
View publication stats